The five-day trip of Indian Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh to Moscow, and the simultaneous visit to Beijing by Russian
Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev, indicate a realization among the three Eurasian
powers of the urgency to set aside, if not overcome, the niggling issues that
have prevented these three large nations from more closely coordinating their
activities to become strategically more effective. The trip led to many
agreements, while leaving many bilateral issues unresolved.

What is nonetheless clear, is that the heads of
state of these three great nations have come to realize that a weakened United
States led by President Obama, and a bankrupt European Union, have made the
world increasingly dangerous, threatening thus, not only their own growth
potential, but the stability of the entire Eurasian region, where nearly 50 per
cent of the world’s population lives. Russian President Vladimir Putin and
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov have repeatedly pointed out that the unipolar
world no longer exists, if indeed it ever did, but it is now beyond doubt a
multipolar world. In this context, stronger and more effective cooperation
among China, India, and Russia is crucial.

On paper, the outcome of the Singh and Medvedev
visits was impressive. The future benefits that can be accrued from these
agreements need forceful and early implementation. Although cooperation to
stabilize the region and pave the way for long-term economic and political
stability was discussed during Singh’s trip, the bilateral issues that continue
to prevent India, in particular, from acting in concert with Russia and China
in many vital areas took center stage.

While the leaders in Moscow and Beijing will
remain at the helm for years to come, a change in Indian leadership in the near
future is almost a certainty. Most certainly, Manmohan Singh will not be
leading the Indian government following general elections, scheduled to be held
in the Spring of 2014. Lack of effort on New Delhi’s part, and weak
participation by Moscow and Beijing in settling the bilateral issues at an
early stage, will decidedly make the region more unstable, making it a happy
hunting ground for troublemakers, and all who oppose China-India-Russia
trilateral cooperation, for geopolitical reasons.

In assessing the situation under which the
Indian premier undertook a trip Oct. 21-24, that took him from Moscow to
Beijing, one must note the devastation of the world economy caused largely by
the trans-Atlantic international bankers, who seized upon the globalization and
liberalization policies to enrich a few, and pauperize the mass. Added to their
policy are machinations by the Obama Administration, along with the European
colonial powers, to unleash an unstoppable wave of militancy and hostility that
stretches from North Africa to Afghanistan - a vast area that holds huge
reserves of energy resources needed by nations around the world, including
China and India. Russia, with its abundant reserves of oil and gas, and its
highly developed nuclear power generation capability, has begun to aid India,
China, and other nations. For its own development, Russia does not need natural
reserves. It can get whatever technology it needs from China, Europe, and
Japan. What it needs is security.

China is developing a transport network along
various old Silk Road routes to link itself with nations situated in the
Eurasian region and southeast Asia. Thus far, India, blocked by a hostile
Pakistan and a troubled Afghanistan in the west, has done little to
interconnect the region, except in Iran, where it played a stellar role in
linking the Strait of Hormuz to Afghanistan by building roads and railroads.

Regional Issues: The Kunming-Kolkata Economic
Corridor

During his Oct. 22-24 visit to Beijing, where
the Chinese authorities rolled out the red carpet for the Indian premier,
Manmohan Singh and the Chinese premier, Li Keqiang agreed to study the
possibility of setting up an economic corridor spanning the two nations and
covering Bangladesh and Myanmar. “Further discussions on concepts and alignment
of the economic corridor are envisaged. Both India and China would continue to
discuss with the other parties to this initiative, and hold the first BCIM
[Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar] Joint Study Group meeting this coming December
to study the specific programs on building the BCIM Economic Corridor,” said a
joint statement. Singh told the press in Beijing that “we are also exploring
the feasibility of the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor
connecting the two countries via the southern Silk Road.”

The BCIM Economic Corridor was first proposed by
the Yunnan provincial government of China about a decade ago. It did not see
the light of day due to a lack of interest by the participating countries. The
proposed BCIM Economic Corridor might run from Kunming in China to Kolkata in
India via Chuxiong-Dali-Baoshan-Dehong-Namhkan in Myanmar,
Lashio-Mandalay-Imphal in India’s Manipur state, Silchar in India’s Assam
state, and Karimganj-Dhaka in Bangladesh. Different versions of a free-trade
area connecting Kunming and Kolkata have been floated for more than 15 years.
Discussions have often been stalled or abandoned due to unresolved Sino-Indian
conflicts.

In December delegates from all four
participating countries will meet in Kunming. According to government
officials, during the talks, China pressed India on the proposed BCIM Economic
Corridor as a way to increase trade (GoKunming.com, Oct. 24, 2013).

The 1,250-mile-long BCIM Corridor is an integral
part of China’s plan to make Kunming a regional hub connecting China to the
economies of South and Southeast Asia. Attempting to accelerate talks with
India regarding BCIM may also be an effort by the Chinese leadership to counter
the United States’ now-fizzling “Asia Pivot” strategic policy. China has
already discussed the BCIM Corridor with Bangladesh, and found Dhaka’s response
very positive, according to a Bangladeshi finance ministry official. “If the
route is established, it will provide Bangladesh with an opportunity to enhance
economic cooperation with the Southeast Asian and East Asian countries,” a
Bangladeshi commerce ministry official told the Indian news daily Financial
Express Oct. 12.

Central Asian Security

In Moscow, Singh’s discussions centered mostly
on how Russia could help India meet its growing energy demand, spanning from
cooperation in electricity production to joint oil and gas exploration in the
Arctic Ocean. Their joint statement on Oct. 21 also said that Russia and India
would review “the possibility of organizing direct overland transportation of
energy supplies from Russia to India.” At this point, there is no direct
land-link between Russia and India; left unsaid, is what measures New Delhi and
Moscow would undertake with the countries through which such an overland
transportation of energy supplies could be made possible.

Broader issues under discussion in Moscow
included the necessity for cooperation between Russia and India to ensure
stability in Central Asia, in light of the withdrawal of US and NATO troops
from Afghanistan in 2014. In a speech to the Moscow State Institute of
International Relations on Oct. 22, Singh named Central Asia as the first
region in which the two giant countries should cooperate.

He focused on security, saying: “As India
revitalizes its historic links with Central Asia, we look forward to working
more closely with Russia in the region. Our cooperation can play an important
role in advancing peace, stability, and economic development in Afghanistan. It
can be equally effective in combating the shared challenges of extremism,
terrorism, and narco-trafficking. Coordination of our policies in this shared
neighborhood has served us both well and we should continue to pursue it more
closely in the future” (EurasiaNet, Oct. 24).

In a joint statement issued following the
meeting between President Putin and Prime Minister Singh, Moscow and New Delhi
called for joint efforts by countries of the region to combat the terrorist
menace in all its forms, including elimination of terrorist safe havens and
cutting off financial support.

“India and Russia recognized terrorism as the
major threat to Afghanistan’s security and stability that jeopardizes peace in
the region and in the whole world. They stressed the regional aspects of
terrorism and extremism, emphasizing the necessity of joint and coordinated
efforts and cooperation between the states of the region, especially taking
into account the expected drawdown of international forces in 2014, in order to
combat terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, including elimination of
terrorist safe havens and cutting off financial support to terrorism,” the
statement said.

Unresolved Bilateral Issues: Russia

Although the India-Russia strategic ties go back
almost four decades, the bilateral relationship has remained centered mostly on
military and energy issues. Despite Russia’s exceptional strength in scientific
areas, and India’s prowess in developing an army of tech-savvy professionals,
bilateral economic and technological relations have not advanced.

During the pre-summit consultations in Moscow,
on modernization and industrial cooperation, both Russia and India acknowledged
their desire to further strengthen bilateral cooperation in areas of civil
aviation, the chemical and fertilizer industry, mining, and automobile
production, but the bilateral trade between the two has remained at an
abysmally low US $11 billion, dominated by military hardware sales.

In the coming years, it is expected that India
will be looking for dozens of large nuclear power plants from Russia to meet
its electrical power requirements. Moscow is willing to supply those plants. In
fact, President Putin said that construction of as many as four more units at
Kudankulam was under consideration. This is in addition to the one that has
gone on-line there, and the other expected to go online next year.

However, Russia’s willingness to supply India
with more nuclear power plants has run into problems, at the center of which is
India’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages Act, 2010 (the Act). The Act
introduced a novel concept of supplier liability in Section 17(b), by which the
operator would have the ability to reclaim any compensation it may from a supplier
if the product supplied has patent or latent defects, or the service provided
is substandard. This clause has been vehemently resisted by major
supplier-countries, including the United States, Russia, and France, on the
grounds that it is not consistent with international norms. Prime Minister
Singh, during his visit to Moscow, made a futile effort to work out a
resolution of this sticking point.

Unresolved Bilateral Issues: China

Singh’s visit to Beijing was clearly promising,
as there was a definite signal given by Premier Li and others that China wants
to develop stronger overall relations with India. During his address to the
Chinese Communist Party’s Central School at Beijing, where Singh also spoke,
China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the Indian Prime Minister’s visit was a
“great success,” as “the two sides sent a positive and powerful message that
the two countries are committed to working together.”

In addition, both sides addressed the vexing
trade imbalance issue. India has a large and growing negative trade balance
with China. If measures are not taken immediately, this issue will get in the
way of expanding their bilateral trade, which is supposed to reach US$100
billion in 2015.

Singh and Li discussed ways to get around this
problem. Under India’s 11th Five-Year Plan (2007-12), 18 GW of thermal power
projects were commissioned, using Chinese-manufactured equipment. In addition,
40 GW of power projects are now being built using equipment from China - more
than from any other country. They agreed on setting up permanent offices for
China’s biggest power companies in India. “This is a landmark move, as it will
pave the way for Chinese power companies to eventually even consider setting up
manufacturing bases in India,” senior Indian officials told the Indian news
daily The Hindu.

Chinese power companies had, so far, limited
their business to selling equipment, despite the growing import demand from
India. “This is a major issue because we have 60,000 MW-plus of Chinese
equipment, most imported by the private sector,” said Montek Singh Ahluwalia,
deputy chairman of the Planning Commission. “From our point of view, this is
creating a new institutional mechanism that will deepen economic cooperation
between the two countries in a very important area,” Indian officials told the
media.

However, the most important issue - settlement
of un-demarcated 3,380-km border - has remained unresolved. On Oct. 23, by
signing the Border Defense Cooperation Agreement, Singh and Li made apparent
progress in managing any future conflicts that may arise from border incursion
by either side. However, the settlement of the border, which is a highly
politicized issue in India, remains to be resolved.

Notwithstanding those shortcomings, what emerged
from this trip is the recognition by all sides that the cooperation among the
three great Eurasian powers has to move forward. Speaking at the Chinese
Communist Party’s Central School, Prime Minister Singh outlined a new vision
for the future of India’s ties with China, detailing “seven practical
principles of engagement” that called for greater sensitivity to core issues,
such as the boundary question and trans-border rivers. “We were not destined to
be rivals, and we should show determination to become partners,” he said. Peace
and tranquility in the China-India border areas was “a cornerstone” of the
relationship, Singh said, a